Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of cultural icons of Italy


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep. postdlf (talk) 14:16, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

List of cultural icons of Italy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The discussion in Articles for deletion/List of cultural icons of Poland says it all. In addition, this article is next to unreferenced, unlike the Polish one. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:40, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 01:10, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:14, 10 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Such lists by country are highly encyclopedic, if reliable sources exist which say "X, Y, and Z" are cultural icons of Country A". If you see a dubious or unreferenced entry tag it as needing a citation, or just be bold and delete it if you search and cannot find reliable sourcing for it. Itayl is clearly blessed with numerous structures, artists, cities, and other "cultural icons" called such in books. Edison (talk) 01:51, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete – I left remarks at the initial discussion Articles for deletion/List of cultural icons of Poland which I would like to fully apply here as well. I note that this particular list promises "encyclopedic" connections among Parma ham, Luigi Nono, and the Etruscan civilization. SteveStrummer (talk) 05:45, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * '''Comment, A list contains some entries which are dubious? Then they should be removed, leaving those which have references saying the are the country's cultural icons or equivalent language. Deletion is not a substitute for editing. It is hilarious to deny that Italy has cultural icons.  Edison (talk) 02:39, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Valid sources exist and the list is encyclopedic. All of the issues that have been raised about this article can be addressed through editing, so deletion is not necessary. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 01:32, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  12:47, 18 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep: This list is encyclopedic if it is sourced accurately. Editing might need to be done, but deletion is not needed. SL93 (talk) 00:07, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.